Why Banks Hire Me By The Year

A bank-client called me today.

An officer of the bank had falsified loan documents so that a report would not show the account as behind. He also failed to file reports on the loan – hiding the account.

My client asked if this would be a dishonest act, causing problems for coverage if this employee embezzled in the future. Yep, this one is trouble.

We now know this employee is dishonest. We should not expect the insurance company to pay for our leniency if keeping the man on leads to a future employee-theft loss.

I have spoken often on the dishonest employee exclusion to the bond. All bank bonds exclude acts by employees who are known to have committed a dishonest acts in the past.

I have kiddingly called this the “stolen candy bar” exclusion. The idea is that if you know an employee stole a candy bar when he was twelve, there is no coverage for an embezzlement claim against that employee two weeks from now. This is serious stuff, though.

In the current event, this employee has shown bad judgement. Further, I can guarantee that there are other things in this employee’s past that are not in keeping with the character of this particular bank. We all know this is not the first time this employee has strayed from the righteous path.

My client (and the other leaders of the bank) are struggling with this decision. They had me as a resource to help them with the insurance ramifications of their decision. My involvement was 100% value to them as they paid me a flat fee for twelve months of availability. I added valuable information that helps the bank make decisions.

That’s why banks hire me by the year.